Case Citator › In Re Nine Mile Limited, D/B/A Serco Administrators and American Warranty Corporation

In Re Nine Mile Limited, D/B/A Serco Administrators and American Warranty Corporation

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Abrogated
Court
Eighth Circuit
Citation
692 F.2d 56
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
29 of 29
Citing cases (total)
29
Treatment dates
1990
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. In re Nine Mile Ltd.'s substantial-contacts test for federal venue is no longer good law in the Eighth Circuit. Missouri Housing Development Commission v. Brice identified the change made by Maybelline Co. v. Noxell Corp.; the confirmed treatment is listed below.
More on how this was screened

Nine Mile's separate caution that transfer motions should not be freely granted continues to be cited. All 29 flagged citations have been read.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

29 later cases cite In Re Nine Mile Limited, D/B/A Serco Administrators and American Warranty Corporation; 29 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on In Re Nine Mile Limited, D/B/A Serco Administrators and American Warranty Corporation?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Abrogated

  • The Eighth Circuit held that the substantial-contacts venue test Nine Mile appeared to endorse was no longer good law.

    Missouri Housing Development Commission v. Brice · Eighth Circuit · filed

    As noted above, the Gardner and Nine Mile appear to have endorsed the “substantial contacts” test for determining where a claim arose. The “substantial contacts” rule, however, is no longer good law in the Eighth Circuit.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads In Re Nine Mile Limited, D/B/A Serco Administrators and American Warranty Corporation and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace